{"id":{"repo_id":"cork","oai_identifier":"oai:cora.ucc.ie:10468/10890"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/cork/oai:cora.ucc.ie:10468/10890","repository":{"repo_id":"cork","name":"University College Cork","base_url":"https://cora.ucc.ie/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Preparation for clinical practice in radiology: a survey of interns and radiologists","abstract":"Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate interns’ preparedness to deal with radiology departments, and to identify knowledge gaps which will facilitate the design of simplified evidence-based radiology orientation course for students or newly qualified doctors, to ease the transition from theory to practice. Methods: A cross-sectional, mixed-methods approach was employed. A sample of Irish interns and practicing radiologists were asked to complete a quantitative survey regarding perceptions of intern readiness to interact with the radiology department. A mixed quantitative/qualitative analysis using group concept mapping was also conducted involving perspectives of doctors in various categories, including NCHDs, and consultants, to evaluate what topics should be covered in a related preparatory course. Pearson’s Chi Square analysis was employed to examine the association between socio-demographic and educational variables and selected categorical item responses. Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (ANOVA) and/or Mann–Whitney U tests were employed to carry out univariate comparisons. Results: The majority of interns 66%( N=66) and radiologists 52%(N=26) felt that undergraduate medical training did not prepare the interns to interact with radiology department. More than half of the intern respondents 52%( N=52) were frequently uncertain about radiology exam indication when completing a request form. Most interns identified challenges in choosing appropriate examinations and communicating with the radiology department. A significant number also regarded the radiology department as unapproachable. Most radiologists 92%( N=92) felt that intern understanding of indications for imaging modalities is inadequate, reflecting intern uncertainty regarding exam indications. Most radiologists 86%(N=43) perceived that interns’ understanding of contrast medium was inadequate, and 78%( N=39) perceived that interns were lacking in the knowledge of (N=39) radiation protection. Results of the group concept analysis suggested the following topics to be included in the intern radiology preparatory module: ordering investigations; clinical decision support; radiology department IT and communication; adverse reactions and risks; urgent imaging; interpretation of radiology results. Conclusion: This study has highlighted vital topics to be included if one were to design a preparatory module in radiology which would promote smooth transition from theory to practice. Future research would be to design, implement, and evaluate an appropriate preparatory module.","abstract_html":"Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate interns’ preparedness to deal with radiology departments, and to identify knowledge gaps which will facilitate the design of simplified evidence-based radiology orientation course for students or newly qualified doctors, to ease the transition from theory to practice. Methods: A cross-sectional, mixed-methods approach was employed. A sample of Irish interns and practicing radiologists were asked to complete a quantitative survey regarding perceptions of intern readiness to interact with the radiology department. A mixed quantitative/qualitative analysis using group concept mapping was also conducted involving perspectives of doctors in various categories, including NCHDs, and consultants, to evaluate what topics should be covered in a related preparatory course. Pearson’s Chi Square analysis was employed to examine the association between socio-demographic and educational variables and selected categorical item responses. Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (ANOVA) and/or Mann–Whitney U tests were employed to carry out univariate comparisons. Results: The majority of interns 66%( N=66) and radiologists 52%(N=26) felt that undergraduate medical training did not prepare the interns to interact with radiology department. More than half of the intern respondents 52%( N=52) were frequently uncertain about radiology exam indication when completing a request form. Most interns identified challenges in choosing appropriate examinations and communicating with the radiology department. A significant number also regarded the radiology department as unapproachable. Most radiologists 92%( N=92) felt that intern understanding of indications for imaging modalities is inadequate, reflecting intern uncertainty regarding exam indications. Most radiologists 86%(N=43) perceived that interns’ understanding of contrast medium was inadequate, and 78%( N=39) perceived that interns were lacking in the knowledge of (N=39) radiation protection. Results of the group concept analysis suggested the following topics to be included in the intern radiology preparatory module: ordering investigations; clinical decision support; radiology department IT and communication; adverse reactions and risks; urgent imaging; interpretation of radiology results. Conclusion: This study has highlighted vital topics to be included if one were to design a preparatory module in radiology which would promote smooth transition from theory to practice. Future research would be to design, implement, and evaluate an appropriate preparatory module.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Simelane, Thabisile"],"institution":"University College Cork","degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["O'Connor, Owen","Ó Tuathaigh, Colm"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2019,"date_issued":"2019-11-05","date_published":"2019-11-05","updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:48:31Z","subjects":["Preparation","Clinical practice","Radiology","Interns or junior doctors","Radiologists"],"languages":["en"],"rights":["© 2019, Thabisile Simelane."],"rights_urls":["https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/"],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://hdl.handle.net/10468/10890","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["O'Connor, Owen","Ó Tuathaigh, Colm"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Simelane, Thabisile"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2021-01-12T09:55:01Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2021-01-12T09:55:01Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2019-11-05"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["University College Cork"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Masters thesis (Research)"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationlevel","label":"Dc Type Qualificationlevel","values":["Masters"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationname","label":"Dc Type Qualificationname","values":["MRes - Master of Research"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Preparation","Clinical practice","Radiology","Interns or junior doctors","Radiologists"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["© 2019, Thabisile Simelane."]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://hdl.handle.net/10468/10890"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate interns’ preparedness to deal with radiology departments, and to identify knowledge gaps which will facilitate the design of simplified evidence-based radiology orientation course for students or newly qualified doctors, to ease the transition from theory to practice. Methods: A cross-sectional, mixed-methods approach was employed. A sample of Irish interns and practicing radiologists were asked to complete a quantitative survey regarding perceptions of intern readiness to interact with the radiology department. A mixed quantitative/qualitative analysis using group concept mapping was also conducted involving perspectives of doctors in various categories, including NCHDs, and consultants, to evaluate what topics should be covered in a related preparatory course. Pearson’s Chi Square analysis was employed to examine the association between socio-demographic and educational variables and selected categorical item responses. Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (ANOVA) and/or Mann–Whitney U tests were employed to carry out univariate comparisons. Results: The majority of interns 66%( N=66) and radiologists 52%(N=26) felt that undergraduate medical training did not prepare the interns to interact with radiology department. More than half of the intern respondents 52%( N=52) were frequently uncertain about radiology exam indication when completing a request form. Most interns identified challenges in choosing appropriate examinations and communicating with the radiology department. A significant number also regarded the radiology department as unapproachable. Most radiologists 92%( N=92) felt that intern understanding of indications for imaging modalities is inadequate, reflecting intern uncertainty regarding exam indications. Most radiologists 86%(N=43) perceived that interns’ understanding of contrast medium was inadequate, and 78%( N=39) perceived that interns were lacking in the knowledge of (N=39) radiation protection. Results of the group concept analysis suggested the following topics to be included in the intern radiology preparatory module: ordering investigations; clinical decision support; radiology department IT and communication; adverse reactions and risks; urgent imaging; interpretation of radiology results. Conclusion: This study has highlighted vital topics to be included if one were to design a preparatory module in radiology which would promote smooth transition from theory to practice. Future research would be to design, implement, and evaluate an appropriate preparatory module."]},{"key":"dc:format.mimetype","label":"Dc Format Mimetype","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Preparation for clinical practice in radiology: a survey of interns and radiologists"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["O'Connor, Owen","Ó Tuathaigh, Colm"],"dc:creator":["Simelane, Thabisile"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2021-01-12T09:55:01Z"],"dc:date.available":["2021-01-12T09:55:01Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2019-11-05"],"dc:description.abstract":["Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate interns’ preparedness to deal with radiology departments, and to identify knowledge gaps which will facilitate the design of simplified evidence-based radiology orientation course for students or newly qualified doctors, to ease the transition from theory to practice. Methods: A cross-sectional, mixed-methods approach was employed. A sample of Irish interns and practicing radiologists were asked to complete a quantitative survey regarding perceptions of intern readiness to interact with the radiology department. A mixed quantitative/qualitative analysis using group concept mapping was also conducted involving perspectives of doctors in various categories, including NCHDs, and consultants, to evaluate what topics should be covered in a related preparatory course. Pearson’s Chi Square analysis was employed to examine the association between socio-demographic and educational variables and selected categorical item responses. Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (ANOVA) and/or Mann–Whitney U tests were employed to carry out univariate comparisons. Results: The majority of interns 66%( N=66) and radiologists 52%(N=26) felt that undergraduate medical training did not prepare the interns to interact with radiology department. More than half of the intern respondents 52%( N=52) were frequently uncertain about radiology exam indication when completing a request form. Most interns identified challenges in choosing appropriate examinations and communicating with the radiology department. A significant number also regarded the radiology department as unapproachable. Most radiologists 92%( N=92) felt that intern understanding of indications for imaging modalities is inadequate, reflecting intern uncertainty regarding exam indications. Most radiologists 86%(N=43) perceived that interns’ understanding of contrast medium was inadequate, and 78%( N=39) perceived that interns were lacking in the knowledge of (N=39) radiation protection. Results of the group concept analysis suggested the following topics to be included in the intern radiology preparatory module: ordering investigations; clinical decision support; radiology department IT and communication; adverse reactions and risks; urgent imaging; interpretation of radiology results. Conclusion: This study has highlighted vital topics to be included if one were to design a preparatory module in radiology which would promote smooth transition from theory to practice. Future research would be to design, implement, and evaluate an appropriate preparatory module."],"dc:format.mimetype":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://hdl.handle.net/10468/10890"],"dc:language.iso":["en"],"dc:publisher":["University College Cork"],"dc:rights":["© 2019, Thabisile Simelane."],"dc:rights.uri":["https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/"],"dc:subject":["Preparation","Clinical practice","Radiology","Interns or junior doctors","Radiologists"],"dc:title":["Preparation for clinical practice in radiology: a survey of interns and radiologists"],"dc:type":["Masters thesis (Research)"],"dc:type.qualificationlevel":["Masters"],"dc:type.qualificationname":["MRes - Master of Research"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:48:31Z"}